BS: Islamic radicalism . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 May 14 - 09:47 AM

Actually, most of the Iranians I knew at uni and later at the College of Law were blokes, and the MOST determined coxemen.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 09 May 14 - 07:23 PM

Boko Haram and the Kidnapped Schoolgirls
By Ayaan Hirsi Ali
May 8, 2014 7:18 p.m. ET

"How to explain this phenomenon to baffled Westerners, who these days seem more eager to smear the critics of jihadism as "Islamophobes" than to stand up for women's most basic rights? Where are the Muslim college-student organizations denouncing Boko Haram? Where is the outrage during Friday prayers?

I am often told that the average Muslim wholeheartedly rejects the use of violence and terror, does not share the radicals' belief that a degenerate and corrupt Western culture needs to be replaced with an Islamic one, and abhors the denigration of women's most basic rights. Well, it is time for those peace-loving Muslims to do more, much more, to resist those in their midst who engage in this type of proselytizing before they proceed to the phase of holy war.

It is also time for Western liberals to wake up. If they choose to regard Boko Haram as an aberration, they do so at their peril. The kidnapping of these schoolgirls is not an isolated tragedy; their fate reflects a new wave of jihadism that extends far beyond Nigeria and poses a mortal threat to the rights of women and girls. If my pointing this out offends some people more than the odious acts of Boko Haram, then so be it."

The Wall Street Journal

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 May 14 - 08:10 PM

Whilst I similarly lament the absence of a central condemnation by Islam of what's going on in Nigeria (I suppose Islam has no Pope, but even having a Pope doesn't seem to help Catholicism to condemn in much of a hurry the rape of thousands of children or the removal of hundreds of Italian Jews to death camps), I demur strongly at your use of the word "jihad". Yes, I was very nasty there to Catholics, most of whom would want nothing to do with the disgusting activities of a minority of their clergy. Similarly, the vast majority of Muslims would want nothing to do with the actions of those thugs in Nigeria. So let's be reasonable and let's stop tarring anti-Islamic actions with an Islam brush. Raping children has nothing to do with mainstream Catholicism. I may be an atheist but I'm fair-minded enough to admit to that. In the same way, abducting little girls has nothing to do with mainstream Islam. So cut the "jihad" crap, right?   
.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 09 May 14 - 08:20 PM

"So cut the "jihad" crap, right?"

Tell that to the jihadis.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 May 14 - 08:26 PM

Well, it is time for those peace-loving Muslims to do more, much more

You betcha, BooBad! Just so soon as peace-loving "Christians"[sic] resist, denounce and abjure the proselytizing and antics of the fundagelical"Christians"[sic] by way of an example.

These same "Christians"[sic] might also oppose the ongoing U.S. drone assassinations of civilians and the state of perpetual "pre-emptive"[sic] war the U.S. is engaged in.

It is also time for Western liberals to wake up. If they choose to regard Boko Haram as an aberration, they do so at their peril.

Now that's just the type of overblown, hysterical anti-Muslim bullshit we've come to expect from you, Boo.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is also a Fox News[sic] professional bloviator and lunatic.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 09 May 14 - 08:33 PM

But MOMMY the Christians do bad things too so we shouldn't criticize the Islamists.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 May 14 - 08:33 PM

So let's be reasonable and let's stop tarring anti-Islamic actions with an Islam brush

BooBoo? Reasonable? That's a joke, right, Steve? Please tell me yiu meant it as a joke.......

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 May 14 - 08:39 PM

I said nothing about "Islamists" (whatever definition you are applying to that term today) BooBoo. Nor did I say anything about not criticising Boko Haram or defending them. Nor did I engage in the standard toddler defense you use to excuse Israel.

Do try to keep up, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 09 May 14 - 09:04 PM

"Here is a paragraph from chapter four of the Qur'an, as translated by the most formidable Islamist scholar of the 20th century, Syed Maududi:

"And forbidden to you are the wedded wives of other people, except those who have fallen in your hands (as prisoners of war): This is the Law of Allah." In his explanation, Maududi goes to great lengths to justify and explain the rightfulness of such rape of non-Muslim POWs.

There are references in the Hadith (sayings of Prophet Mohammed) where sex with enslaved non-Muslim women POWs is discussed in detail.

We Muslims have a choice.

We either develop the maturity to say, such Islamic injunctions do not apply anymore, or we can keep on driving fast-forward in reverse gear, and every time we hit an obstacle that appears in our blind spot, we can blame it on "Islamophobia".

Tarek Fatah: Muslims must denounce Nigerian kidnap outrage

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 01:35 AM

Greg, your link referred to ISIS as a group that did not disown the violence of Boko.
They are Jihadists, many from this country. Two British members were killed in Syria just this week.

Many are now deploring the delay in reacting to the kidnapping.
Boko have killed tens of thousands in recent years with no reaction at all outside Nigeria.
Just a few months ago they attacked a boys school and just killed all the boys.

I reported it on the Christian Persecution thread, the premise of which is that Christians are being persecuted to extinction in many places and no-one cares.
No-one seemed to care about that.

Greg, has any other religion spawned an international movement equivalent to Islamism, whose goal is the destruction of democracy and the imposition by force of Islamic rule and Sharia Law?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 01:39 AM

BBC February
"At least 29 students have been killed after suspected Boko Haram militants attacked a boarding school in north-east Nigeria.

The BBC's Will Ross in Lagos says the remote school in Yobe state was attacked overnight when students were in their dormitories.

All the victims were teenage boys and 11 others were seriously injured. Most of the school was burned to the ground.

Islamist militants have attacked dozens of schools in north-east Nigeria.

Last September, 40 students were killed at an agricultural college during another night-time raid.

Teachers at the school in Buni Yadi said the gunmen gathered the female students together before telling them to go away and get married and to abandon their education."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-26338041

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 10 May 14 - 03:04 AM

Any evidence of a link between lads from here going to fight in Syria and the kidnapping of girls in Nigeria?

Your whitewash brush of "Jihad" is rather appalling Keith.

My great uncle joined the international brigade and fought in Spain, his passage paid by a church group. Does that make him related to making homosexuality a crime in Uganda?

zzzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 03:16 AM

Yes Musket.
The link is they are both Islamist groups whose members describe themselves as Jihadists.

Tell us again that story you made up about Christians attacking a school and feeding Muslim children to pigs.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 03:17 AM

You said it happened in Nigeria.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 03:27 AM

Independent Yesterday
"Boko Haram is a militant Islamist group based in the northeast of Nigeria, north Cameroon and Niger.

The group's official name is Jama'atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda'awati wal-Jihad, which in Arabic translates as: "People Committed to the Propagation of the Prophet's Teachings and Jihad"."

International Business Times. February.
"Syria: ISIS Jihadis Strangle Girl to Death for Breaking Sharia [GRAPHIC IMAGES]"http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/syria-isis-jihadis-publically-strangle-girl-death-not-conforming-sharia-islam-graphic-images-1436502

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 May 14 - 03:53 AM

Look, all religions are evil, and Boko Haram and ISIS are cunts - but these "Islamists" are as much the enemy of less extreme Muslims as they are of the rest of the world. The conflation of this sort of Islamism with Islam in general makes dealing with this sort of Islamism much harder. Having said that it does seem to me that there is a lot wrong with Sharia law - as far as I know what it is - in general (some bits are good, like the attitude to interest) and in the way that even moderate Islam treats women as second-class. But one cannot begin to hope that moderate Islam will come to fit more comfortably with the world if one merely assumes that Boko Haram illuminates moderate Islam.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 03:58 AM

these "Islamists" are as much the enemy of less extreme Muslims as they are of the rest of the world.
I agree, and also note that Jihadists in Syria and Iraq are fighting a purely inter-Muslim holy war.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 06:57 AM

When are these morons going to come to terms with the fact that in the mann, these are not religious conflicts, but disputes over territory and political power, and atrocities are not confined to one side - all wars take place with claims of "God on our side"
"Many of the attacks by the anti-balaka involved shocking brutality: a Muslim nomadic cattle herder told Human Rights Watch she was forced to watch as anti-balaka fighters cut the throats of her three-year-old son, two boys, ages 10 and 14, and an adult relative – all the Muslim males in the cattle camp. A man tearfully described escaping from anti-balaka attackers, only to watch in horror from a hiding place as they proceeded to cut the throats of his two wives, his 10 children and a grandchild, as well as other Muslims they had captured.
A Muslim woman told Human Rights Watch that she was outside cooking at 5 a.m. when the anti-balaka came and attacked their home: "They began to cut my husband with their machetes on his side and his back, and cut his throat. After they killed him, they set our house on fire, and threw his body on the fire, together with my son's. They ordered my 13-year-old boy to come outside and lie down, and then cut him two times with a machete and killed him."
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

38,000 Muslim civilians were slaughtered by Christians in former Yugoslavia.
These are wars for territory and influence - religion is a flag some of them fly under, and, as in all wars, they are as bad as one another.
Syria is a disgusting example of what happens when nothing is done by the "civilised" nations (sic) - it was a war against Assad's atrocities (backed by UK and American support) and remains exactly the same - those now opposing Assad making up for Western inaction.
It is not surprising that Britain voted against intervention against their old ally and trading partner.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 07:11 AM

Parliament outvoted the government, even though all 3 parties were in favour of intervention, as were both US parties.
Only UKIP and the Tea Party and all Mudcat apart from us two were against.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 08:05 AM

Jim, about your two examples of Christians persecuting Muslims.

Bosnia. The British Army defended the Muslims and brought peace.
Small cheer?

CAR.
After years of peaceful co-existence, Muslims seized power and began massacring Christians. What you report is the backlash which can not be defended but it was those massacres that caused the hatred.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 10 May 14 - 08:17 AM

Funny way to say sorry keith...

After all, the feeding of bodies to pigs would, if it were Muslims doing it to Christians rather than the other way around, something you would be shouting from the rooftops...

Just because an account from an aid worker doesn't make The Daily M*ail doesn't mean you can breathe a sigh of relief for your precious church...

Perhaps when you stop calling me a liar for noting the account, (the truth of which I never put forward one way or another, I leave calling stories "truth" to you and your prejudices) you might get a more measured response than TC.

TC

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 08:19 AM

"Parliament outvoted the government"
That's what I said - Britain refused to intervene.
Those opposing Assad at the present time, whatever we might think of their religion and politics, are in fact freedom fighters, ad it is a characteristic of ultra-rights like yourself to pass off freedom fighting as terrorism - its as old as Hereward the Wake.
Putting a war against a serial torturer and mass-murderer just about confirms your 'ultra-rightness'.
"all Mudcat apart from us two were against."
You persist in this lie - giving me the opportunity once more to point out that you, despite all your Uriah Heep hand-wringing for the murdered of Homs, not only opposed intervention ("we can't ber expected to fight everybody's wars" or some such garbage) , but you actually expressed support for Assad by apporoving of Britain having supplied armoured cars, tear gas, water cannon, sniper rifle bullets (which you mistook for rifles, but still condoned them) and other anti-personnel equipment - the last time we argued about it, that remained your position.
You topped that by defending the sale of chemicals which quite likely added to the chemical weapons he used on Syrian civilians.
Like it or not, you really fell out of the closet as a pro-Assadite on that occasion.
Back to the main point - Christians are just as capable of slaughtering those of other religions when it suits them; sometimes it has been actually about religion - on this occasion it is about political of disputed territories.
I used to have the old newspaper cutting reporting the Pope blessing the bombs being sent to kill the people of Abyssinia.
Funny old thing, religion!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 09:45 AM

Musket, You claimed to have heard BBC report Christians attacking a Muslim school in Nigeria, killing the children and feeding them to pigs.
There is no trace of such a story on BBC or any other news site, and no-one else has heard of any such atrocity because you made it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 09:51 AM

Jim, unlike you I did not think it sensible for Western troops to intervene in another Arab land.
Obama's proposed limited strikes over chemical weapons were only supported here by we two.
Britain's 3 parties, US 2 parties and Holland's party in France were with us, UKIP and the Teas with Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 09:57 AM

"Jim, unlike you I did not think it sensible for Western troops to intervene in another Arab land."
So that's why you proposed ssad be sold equipment to kill and suppress the Syrian people?
Please don't attempt to associate your open appeasement of human rights abuses to my opposition to it again.
Whatever I might be, you are a rightist turd.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 11:04 AM

BBC today.
"Mrs Obama, who was speaking ahead of Mother's Day in the US on Sunday, said the girls reminded her and her husband of their own daughters.

"What happened in Nigeria was not an isolated incident. It's a story we see every day as girls around the world risk their lives to pursue their ambitions," she said.

She cited the Pakistani schoolgirl and campaigner Malala Yousafzai, who was shot and wounded by the Taliban for speaking out for girls' education. "

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 11:39 AM

Describing the situation in Nigeria as a holy war is totally dishonest.
The present problems date back to it being granted Independence in 1960, exacerbated by the end of the Cold War - it is a dispute for territory and political control - not an Islamic holy war, as our resident Islamophobes claim.
Not to say that Islamists aren't involved or aren't committing atrocities - but it has nothing to do with being a Muslim.
Why do you turdules - especially those maggots who describe themselves 'Christian' but represent paganism at its worst, turn a human tragedy into an attack on someone else's religion?
Jim Carroll
Culturally, Nigeria is a multitribal system in which every tribe wants to excel or suppress the other, so they are not on the same level playgrounds. Every person in politics is regionalized and people are capitalizing on that. Once leadership is zoned in the country, one cannot expect to get the best, but Nigerians are trying to live with what they presently have. There are more than 300 different tribal groups in Nigeria, all of which belong to the political definition "Nigerian" but are distinct from one another in terms of cultural practices. Added to this are economic disparities among the various groups, as well as potential for conflict on religious grounds, especially between the long-established Muslim population and the rapidly growing Christian sector.
THE PRESENT NIGERIAN CONFLICT

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 11:52 AM

Boko Haram say they are fighting a Holy War.
Wall St. Journal 2 days ago.
But little attention has been paid to the group's(Boko Haram's) formal Arabic name: Jam'at Ahl as-Sunnah lid-da'wa wal-Jihad. That roughly translates as "The Fellowship of the People of the Tradition for Preaching and Holy War." That's a lot less catchy than Boko Haram but significantly more revealing about the group and its mission. Far from being an aberration among Islamist terror groups, as some observers suggest, Boko Haram in its goals and methods is in fact all too representative.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303701304579549603782621352

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 10 May 14 - 12:05 PM

From the Richard Dawkins Foundation:Innovating for a Secular World

"Ayaan [Hirsi Ali] is a fellow with the Future of Diplomacy Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard Kennedy School. She is also a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, currently researching the relationship between the West and Islam. Her willingness to speak out for the rights of women, along with her abandonment of the Muslim faith, continue to make her a target for violence by Islamic extremists. She lives with round-the-clock security.

A few weeks ago, Ayaan and I had a long conversation about her critics and about the increasingly pernicious meme of "Islamophobia"—which our inimitable friend Christopher Hitchens once dubbed "a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons."

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 12:43 PM

"Boko Haram say they are fighting a Holy War."
Maybe - but this is a tiny and extremist part of a larger picture
You have consistently presented these conflicts as Holy Wars - they are not.
Muslims have been fighting in Syria in opposition to the Assad regime's despotism - thyey are prominent in doing so because the rest of the world couldn't give a toss.
The Muslims in Syria are freedom fighters, but your sick manipulation has made what is happening there a "Holy War".
Once again, you are leeching off the deaths of innocents to feed your bigotry.
The same with Nigeria - a conflict between disputing tribes which has been going on since at least 1960 - not a holy war, but a fight for political and territorial influence - nothing to do with religion.
By your sick logic, the war in Afghanistan is a Holy War between Muslims and Christians.
Is this the way your particular religion has brought you up to behave as a Christian?
I don't know any Christians whose religion resembles your twisted bigotry.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 12:54 PM

The word, according to the Anglicans - but maybe they aren't your type of 'Christian.
Jim Carroll.
"According to a report by a high level Christian-Muslim taskforce comprising the World Council of Churches (WCC) and the Royal Jordanian Aal Al Bayt Institute (RABIIT), while the violence between Christians and Muslims in Nigeria is the worst between members of the two faiths since the Bosnian war of 1992-1995, the sectarian conflict is driven by poverty, inequality and injustice."
BEYOND RELIGIOUS TENSIONS

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 May 14 - 01:01 PM

"UNICEF condemns the decision to allow the public flogging of 17-year-old Bariya Ibrahim Magazu in the northern Nigerian State of Zamfara on Friday, as punishment for becoming pregnant outside of marriage.
Bariya, who cannot read or write, was apparently not aware of her right to appeal her sentence and was not provided with adequate legal counsel. Her case has provoked a torrent of criticism from within Nigeria and around the world - not only because the girl testified that her pregnancy resulted from rape, but because of the fundamental violation of human rights that flogging represents. Bariya was lashed with a cane 100 times on Friday." Unicef Press Release 2010
.,,.,
Oh yes, of course, Jim. Nothing but tribal conflict tore that poor girl's buttocks to shreds. Nothing whatever, of course, to do with this occurring in the Islamic part Of N Nigeria where Sharia Law applies.

God, but you can be an obstinate hidebound know-it-all holier-than-thou fool when the fit comes on you...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 10 May 14 - 01:19 PM

I doubt an interview with an aid worker becomes BBC editorial, but who am I to tell .

After all, according to Keith, I tell lies. So.. Where do we start.. Still got that court order out on you Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 01:24 PM

"Oh yes, of course, Jim. Nothing but tribal conflict tore that poor girl's buttocks to shreds. "
As I said - and as you choose to ignore, there are extremists involved in all these conflicts - you are getting as good as Keith with your crocodile tears wept for beaten Children on the one hand, while ignoring the killing of three-year olds by Christians.
They are ugly, vicious wars carried out by thugs - of all denominations.
Good job it wasn't British soldier hacked to death by a Muslim nutter or we'd have needed Noah to pull us out of the deluge.
My poit is that whatever they might be, they are not Holy Wars, as your little volcano-squatting cabal would have them to be.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 May 14 - 01:25 PM

along with her abandonment of the Muslim faith

Gee, Boo- ya think that may be one of the reasons she's a Fox News Nutcase & says the extreme, hysterical, nonsensical things she does??

Like many a "former _______________" (drinker, smoker, Scientologist, whatever) she's simply intoleranty of anyopne who hasn't "seen the light".

Your knowledge of human nature is sorely lacking.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 May 14 - 01:37 PM

But it wasn't 'extremism', for crying out loud, Jim; it was the action of the legal, democratically elected government, working within the teachings and precepts of the professed and established state religion. Isn't that just the sort of point you can never get into your hidebound ☠!

Oh, what's the use!...

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 May 14 - 01:52 PM


I doubt an interview with an aid worker becomes BBC editorial, but who am I to tell .
Such a story most certainly would.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 10 May 14 - 02:05 PM

"Your knowledge of human nature is sorely lacking."

Gee Greg I wonder who should I think would have more credibility when it comes to knowledge of matters Islam - someone who was once an adherent of the faith, renounced it and is now a fierce opponent of it where it comes to matters of women's rights and some of it's more violent aspects as practiced by Muslim extremists or some folk music enthusiast on an internet folk music forum......hmm, that's a tough one, let me give it some thought......NOT!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 02:10 PM

"But it wasn't 'extremism', "
I seem to remember six million reasons why not to trust "legally elected governments"
As for them working within the precepts of "the professed and established state religion" all religion is open to misinterpretation and misuse - does't make them Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or anyting - just extremism
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 May 14 - 02:24 PM

For the record Boko Harem came into existence in 2002 - Islam is how old exactly?
I hav no problem in describing this mob as extremist nutters - you ant your team are targetting Muslims.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 May 14 - 02:37 PM

"But it wasn't 'extremism', "
I seem to remember six million reasons why not to trust "legally elected governments" ...
.,,.
Well done, Jim: it was you who obeyed Godwin's Law and made this inevitable comparison... But 'extremism', however defined, carries an overtone of small fringe splinter groups. Totalitarianism in government is another thing entirely.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 May 14 - 12:59 PM

Gee Greg I wonder who should I think would have more credibility

You missed the point entirely, Boo, or, more likely, you're simply ignoring it. Try re-reading 10 May 14 - 01:25 PM

when it comes to knowledge of matters Islam

We're not discussing "matters Islam", Boo - we're discussing extremists.
Not that would stop you tarring all Muslims with your usual Islamaphobic brush.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 May 14 - 01:16 PM

"Well done, Jim: it was you who obeyed Godwin's Law and made this inevitable comparison.."
Ad it's you who consistently refuses to see the comparisons Mike
Blame the Muslims - blame the Jews - it's all the same foetid bigotry as far as I'm concerned, and in both cases, it kills people.
The difference appears to be that you choose to choose a 'special case' for one while indulging in bigotry against the other.
You appear to be able to live with that.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 11 May 14 - 01:25 PM

Nice eh?

A recent episode of the Hamas-affiliated television program Pioneers of Tomorrow featured a disturbing combination of talking bee mascot and a discussion of shooting Jews — all of them.

Hamas TV for kids: Let's shoot all the Jews!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 May 14 - 01:46 PM

Hey, Boo! Let's shoot all the Muslims, instead. Right?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 May 14 - 02:56 PM

Be all that as it may, Jim: I still maintain that the use of the term 'extremist' of the actions and policies & established forensic systems of a legally constituted government, internationally recognised as such, is an emotive and tendentious dislocation of the language. And would urge you to recollect the steps thought necessary to moderate the activities of the one you cited in reply last time I made this point. And then appreciate how ill-considered comparisons & analogies are liable to turn around and bite you on the bum. Or do you really think similar reactions would be appropriate to curb the activities of the adultress-stoners and rape-victim caners? Or if not, then what is your point precisely?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 14 - 09:22 AM

"Not that would stop you tarring all Muslims with your usual Islamaphobic brush."

Islamophobia - "a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons."

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 12 May 14 - 09:23 AM

Previous GUEST post was me.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 May 14 - 09:42 AM

to manipulate morons

Well, Boo, seems to have manipulated YOU alright.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 May 14 - 09:45 AM

"is an emotive and tendentious dislocation of the language"
You appear to be attempting to censor the way I put forward my point of view
I'm not being abusive - I don't believe I am being offensive - I am merely making comparisons I believe to be valid.
I find it offensive that anybody should undermine an entire ethic or cultural group by lumping them in with the extremists
I find it offensive that you, and others refuse to respond to questions of what you feel should happen to these people who make you uncomfortable.
I have yet to ask you not to express the opinions you have, nor would I dream of doing so
Comparisons with Nazism have come from within Israel, as have the use of the term, "Apartheid State".
You put down my objection to Keith's "cultural implant" accusation as "a misunderstanding on my part" - it seems you are happy to defend extreme language if it fortifies your own opinions.
You have persistently sneered at my concern for racism and my efforts to have it toned down on this forum and you have shown yourself quite capable of abuse in response to things you don't agree with.
Perhaps when you begin to show some awareness of the effects irrational xenophobia such as yours has on the lives of people who, in the main, appear to be peaceable and law-abiding, maybe you might have some claim of consideration for your own sensitivities.
Jim Carroll